France’s new prime minister, His Majesty's ‘opposition’ and La France Insoumise

Since Sébastien Lecornu's appointment on 9 September, the mainstream media have been singing the same old tune as they did in the early days of Barnier and Bayrou’s premierships: the new Prime Minister is a man of ‘dialogue’ and ‘compromise’, an affable ‘negotiator’ appreciated by the parliamentary opposition – in short, the political equivalent of the ideal son-in-law.

[Originally published in French at marxiste.org]

The repetition of these empty phrases is becoming less and less credible. Sébastien Lecornu is already overwhelmingly rejected: a poll published on Sunday credits him with an approval rating of 16 percent. Never before has a French Prime Minister started at such a low level.

All the media hype about Lecornu's personal qualities has only one purpose: to try to lend credence to the upcoming ‘consultations’ between Matignon [residence of the French PM] and all the parliamentary ‘opposition’ parties (with the exception of La France Insoumise), as well as with the leaders of the trade union confederations.

If all the parties that brought down Bayrou on 8 September committed to voting for the next no-confidence motion, Lecornu would be doomed to fall as soon as parliament resumed. A dissolution of the National Assembly – or, failing that, Macron's resignation – would then be virtually inevitable.

However, at this point, only La France Insoumise (FI) has firmly committed to censuring Lecornu. The leaders of National Rally (RN), the Socialist Party (PS), the Greens and the Communist Party (PCF) have all agreed to engage in ‘dialogue’ with the new prime minister. How can this be explained? Why are the parties that overthrew Bayrou on 8 September now open to discussion with the staunch Macronist who has succeeded him? And how long can this last?

It is worth addressing this aspect of the political situation, as it helps to highlight – by contrast – the tasks facing FI and the left wing of the trade union movement.

The RN's ‘coquetry’

The RN leaders say they have “no illusions” about the new Prime Minister; they are calling for early legislative elections. But, at the same time, they do not want to commit to censuring the government straight away. It will be “either rupture [as in, a radical change in policy] or censure”, they explain. But if they have “no illusions” in the Prime Minister, and thus point to the possibility of a “rupture”, what is the point of waiting? Franceinfo quotes a ‘lieutenant of Marine Le Pen’ who attempts an explanation: “because 5 percent of our electorate needs to be reassured, to see that we are trying to negotiate. For pensioners in particular, this coquettishness matters.”

In reality, there is indeed ‘coquetry’ on the part of the RN leaders, but it is not aimed at 5 percent of their electorate, or at least not primarily. It is aimed above all at the big bourgeoisie, which is now forced to consider a coalition government led by the RN. At a time when a growing number of leaders of The Republicans (LR) are preparing for this, Le Pen and her clique are seeking to reassure big business, to show them that they are ‘responsible’ and ‘respectful of institutions’ (‘unlike Mélenchon’, the man of ‘chaos’).

An RN-led government, in the wake of early legislative elections, would pursue austerity policies quite similar to those of the Macronists / Image: European Parliament, Flickr

However, the absolute limit of this ‘coquetry’ is what the RN's working-class electorate thinks. They have no illusions about Lecornu and demand his downfall as soon as possible. The RN leaders are well aware of this and will be forced – no doubt fairly quickly – to stop bowing and scraping and commit to voting for a motion of no confidence.

Other factors come into play in the RN's attitude towards the new prime minister. An RN-led government, in the wake of early legislative elections, would pursue austerity policies quite similar to those of the Macronists, which would undermine Le Pen's (or President of the RN, Bardella's) candidacy in the presidential election.

Furthermore, what Le Pen and Bardella definitely do not want is an early general election held in the wake of (or even in the midst of) a powerful mobilisation of young people and workers. Such a scenario would favour La France Insoumise, which supports workers' struggles, to the detriment of the RN, which opposes them.

From the point of view of the labour movement, the conclusion is clear: the best way to stop the RN's electoral rise is through class struggle, massive extra-parliamentary struggle, unifying all workers – regardless of their origin, nationality and religion – on the basis of a programme that breaks with all austerity policies. The RN constantly flatters the ‘French people’, but it fears nothing more than massive struggles by working people to defend their rights and living conditions.

Is the Socialist Party “at the centre of the game” – or on the brink of disaster?

Since Bayrou's fall, “the Socialist Party once again finds itself at the centre of the game,” wrote a Franceinfo journalist recently. The fact is that the 66 PS deputies alone can protect Lecornu from a motion of no confidence. They are therefore haggling over their support: they are demanding ‘action’ from Lecornu on taxing the richest and on pension reform, in particular.

The PS' ‘social’ demands are extremely moderate: for example, they are no longer calling for the repeal of the latest pension reform, which raised the retirement age to 64. And for good reason: if they were to firmly demand a return to retirement at 62, the PS leaders would be forced to censure Lecornu immediately, as he has no intention of giving in on an issue that affects the fundamental interests of the big bourgeoisie. This is the case with the 2023 pension reform.

Given France's economic situation and the objective needs of the ruling class, Lecornu will not be able to go beyond abandoning the plan to eliminate two public holidays, to which he will add a few symbolic measures. For the rest, he will start from the austerity budget plan concocted by François Bayrou and stick to it. His budget will attack young people, workers, the unemployed and pensioners – to the benefit of big business.

The leaders of the PS are well aware of this and will therefore face the following dilemma: either they pay a heavy price electorally for supporting the Lecornu government, knowing that they have a lot to lose in next March's municipal elections; or they vote for censure, at the risk of precipitating early legislative elections, the outcome of which would be very uncertain for them. In the absence of an electoral agreement with La France Insoumise in the first round (of the NUPES or New Popular Front type), the PS could lose a large number of seats in the National Assembly.

In the first case, the damage is almost certain; in the second, it is only probable. We can therefore assume that the PS leadership will move towards censuring Lecornu sooner or later. They will simply try to delay the deadline, particularly because Olivier Faure, first secretary of the PS, and his colleagues do not want early parliamentary elections to be held in the context of a powerful mobilisation of young people and workers. Like the leaders of the RN and the entire right wing, the PS leaders fear that the FI will take advantage of this to their detriment.

The leaders of the PCF and the Greens are in a similar situation to that of the PS leaders. They face the same dilemma. They know that without a general alliance with the FI for the first round, early legislative elections could end very badly for them. However, if they do not vote for the censure of Lecornu and his austerity budget, they will emerge deeply discredited – to the benefit of the FI. 

For the rest, they are trying to stay as close as possible to the PS, but without completely breaking with the FI. We saw what this meant when the PS refused to vote for the no-confidence motion against Bayrou in January 2025: the leaders of the PCF and the Greens voted for the censure motion, but they defended the PS against Mélenchon's attacks. In this area, Marine Tondelier, secretary of the Greens, differs from Fabien Roussel, secretary of the Communist Party, only in her less aggressive attitude towards the FI. 

But who is still interested in all these carefully calibrated postures? Certainly not the mass of young people and workers, the most conscious and militant section of whom are turning their attention to the most ‘radical’ political force, relatively speaking: La France Insoumise.

The role of La France Insoumise

La France Insoumise is the only parliamentary force calling for the overthrow of both Lecornu and Macron as soon as possible. Not only is FI committed to censuring the new government from the outset, it is also calling for intensified extra-parliamentary mobilisation on the streets and in workplaces. All this puts Mélenchon's movement in a favourable position to benefit from the massive opposition to Macron's government.

However, FI leaders have demonstrated more than once in the past that they can veer to the right at the worst possible moment. This was the case when they formed NUPES in April 2022: the FI took in all the castaways from the right wing of reformism (PS, Greens and PCF), who resumed their right-wing attacks on the FI once the legislative elections were over. The formation of the New Popular Front (NFP) in June 2024 was a repeat of the same mistake, which ended in the same way.

La France Insoumise is the only parliamentary force calling for the overthrow of both Lecornu and Macron as soon as possible / Image: MathieuMD, Wikimedia Commons

If Mélenchon and his comrades were to repeat this mistake a third time, in the event of early legislative elections, they would be doing the RN a big favour. It's quite simple: a new NFP-type electoral alliance with the PS, the Greens and the PCF will not generate any kind of support among the millions of workers who (not without reason) detest these three old ‘governing parties’, in particular the PS.

As a result, these workers will waver between abstention and voting for the RN. Failure to understand this means completely missing the fundamental political dynamic, which can be summed up in the following equation: as soon as the FI veers to the right, the RN benefits; conversely, the more the FI veers to the left, the more it will undermine the rise of the RN.

In the immediate term, the FI must throw all its forces into developing the extra-parliamentary struggle that began on 10 September. By calling for a ‘general strike’, Mélenchon has hit the nail on the head. But building a general strike and, above all, a vast movement of renewable strikes, which alone can create the conditions for a decisive victory for our camp, requires enormous agitation and organisation – sector by sector, company by company.

Several CGT federations and local structures are pushing in this direction, against the will of the leaders of the trade union confederation. The FI must side with the left wing of the CGT and join with it in a broad campaign to build a lasting ‘blockade’ of the country.

In doing so, the workers will demonstrate to everyone – and first and foremost to themselves – that they are the decisive force in society, the force that must take power and reorganise the economy on new, socialist foundations.